New stewards are elected about once per year; you can also comment on current stewards. Stewards perform technical tasks on all Wikimedia wikis based on community consensus: changing user access, viewing user information in cases of abuse, and so on (see details).

Candidate submissions are open from 14 January 2010, 00:00 (UTC) until 28 January 2010, 23:59. Questions to the candidates can be submitted until 6 February 2010, 23:59 (UTC).

The voting began on 7 February 2010, 00:00 (UTC) and ended 28 February 2010, 23:59 (UTC). Candidates must meet the criteria and obtain at least 30 votes in favor with an 80% support ratio. The Board of Trustees will select stewards from the applicants in this election. You can track the results with collected statistics.

Stewards perform technical tasks on all Wikimedia wikis based on community consensus: modifying user access, viewing user information in cases of abuse, and so on (see details). If you are interested in becoming a steward, see the application guidelines.

The voting has started on 07 February 2010 (UTC) and will end on 28 February 2010 (UTC). Candidates must meet the criteria (see application guidelines) and, to be elected, obtain at least 30 votes in favor with an 80% support ratio. The Board of Trustees will select stewards from the applicants in this election.

Personal info: Looking for information, I came into contact with wikipedia in May 2005. Through contribution on wikipedia, I quickly evolved into a cross-wiki vandalism fighter. I was also very busy with wiki supporting tasks. As such I was moderator and bureaucrat on the Dutch Wikipedia and Wiktionary. As a bot operator and programmer I designed some tools for Wiktionary (especially nl.wiktionary), including a php script (for conversion of translations of other wiktionaries and formatting of the wiki-code) and an AWB plugin (for systematically completing pages nl.wiktionary). Following appointment by the arbitration, I was one year and two months checkuser on the Dutch Wikipedia to check for sockpuppet abuse. Hence, I am familiar with the privacy and other relevant guidelines for stewards. Because of limited time, I took a wikibreak in September 2009 and resigned for all functions (sysop, bureacrat, checkuser, and bot operator). However, this is the past and I would like to further support the Wikimedia projects and help with the steward tasks.

billinghurstsDrewth 12:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC) [1] shows tool usage and knows about Mediawiki files. Editing gaps in a few places was a concern, though there looks to be an underlying disagreement in parts of nl wikispace, and does bite back a little, though that can be good and bad.

Perhaps I misunderstand the role, but I do not see perfect "diplomacy" as necessary for the role of steward — the issue is trust (and knowledge). Given that perception, I will cast this vote without attempting to unravel allegations from the oppose section based on that. Editors whose opinion I trust support this candidate (and I applaud the technical assistance to the project). Proofreader77 22:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose user is simply incapable. As an admin on wp-nl I already had my doubts. Instead of helping with maintenance, Annabel was heavily involved in clan wars. Instead of mediating, Annabel was an escalating factor in many (perhaps most) conflicts. Last year she decided to leave the project, but she keeps coming back, only to settle scores with her opponents (i.e.: whenever we have an election). She should first show she can cooperate constructively before she gets another responsible function. Woudloper 22:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately this reaction tells more about you than about me. Annabel 23:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I believe your intentions are good but being capable of constructive cooperation is imho a prerequisite to become a steward. Cooperation doesn't mean only telling others to do as you say. Your reaction shows you're incapable of self-reflection at this stage. Woudloper 23:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Woudloper, it is you, not me who as a member of the arbitration comitee made private agreements with a blocked person, agreements conflicting the comitees own rules, and did not inform your colleagues about them? Hence, my reaction shows that I want to let the past for what it is, unless I'm forced to show the background of some things in the correct perspective. Annabel 06:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

It is you, not me who is a candidate in this election. What your reaction shows is that your primary reaction to critique is attacking the messenger. That's exactly why you were causing trouble as an admin and it makes you even less fit to become steward. Woudloper 10:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I really do not see any of the other projects in terms of clans. edited at 14:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Annabel 23:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I always assume good faith, but after all what hapened on nl.wp I think it's better to get active again before taking a step like this. Lolsimon 23:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I take note of this. I do not doubt everything I did was 100% positive (no one is perfect). Annabel 06:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

My vote is based on some rethoughts. I really appreciate your contributions to wp, but after all what hapened I don't think this is the right moment to be a steward. Lolsimon 08:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

regarding her role on the dutch wikipedia it's better she will not be a steward here. Bijltjespad 00:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Basically per Innv, given your recent activity I don't feel this is best time. It just leaves to many questions about how active you would be and to be totally honest. James (TC) 01:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

CaAl 11:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC) Instead of trying to improve herself based on the (at least partly just) comments of Woudloper and Lolsimon above; Annabel tries to discredit these users by bringing up irrelevant stuff about them. This, combined with the fact (my POV) that there is a more than sufficient number of candidates, is the reason for my vote.

NellieBly 01:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC) - not per Woudloper but per your replies to Woudloper.

Oppose - NL wikipedia is a failed project were users treat you like shit if you do not belong to one of the "clans of friends" basically destroying the place. Any more users from there as Steward will certainly bring this over to other projects. Waerth 16:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Bjoertvedt 18:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC) - seems to have low activity and conflicts in the past.

Stormbay 20:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC) - a successful candidate should have a higher level of activity and less evidence of past conflicts.

Hardly any activity... please become more active, then I'll probably support you next time. Pmlineditor∞ 11:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Yes to the technical skills but no to the people ones. General defensiveness and attacks on others !voting "no" does not bode well for this candidate's likely success in the job. —The preceding unsigned comment was added byBielle (talk • contribs) 20:41, 11 February 2010.

The replies to Woudloper above do not give me a good feeling. Sandstein 21:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Sometimes, she's wandering at the Dutch Wikipedia (her (former) home Wikipedia) to make her statements in complicated disputes, but in reality she's doing nothing significant to encyclopediae at this time, so hereby my oppose. MMaerkk 22:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Fontes 23:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC) - I am sorry. By your reactions on the fifth oppose-vote here; Stating that the own mistakes a user made in the past makes his criticism unjust is a kind of illogical and unrealistic way of thinking that I would not like to see someone applying in a decision concerning a global lock (par example).

Oppose Seems to be a bad choice. Pieter2 23:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

A user with a known past for discriminatory and biased editing, actually a candidate for a stewart? Please... A cow is the last thing we need. ToFonikoAgouri 18:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you are not eligible to vote. Fontes 20:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Per some of the replies I have seen. I would also like to see some more involvement from a possible Steward candidate than I see with you. If you remain active through this year, I would be more than happy to support next year. Dusti 00:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Sound like more of a cop to me. Very little activity, gotta be constantly on the job. You are.... REJECTED!! --SpartanGreg09 22:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, you are not eligible to vote. Fontes 22:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I do not think the need for stewards is currently so great that any cadidate with whom there are even small concerns over recent activity and interaction with others should be made a steward. No offense intended. Jerry 22:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't like the reply to Woudloper. Expect more maturity in communication. --Jacob 04:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I hold various privileges on the English Wikipedia that allow me to be very familiar and comfortable with the steward roles of checkuser, oversight, bot privileges, and renaming. While most of my contributions are on the English Wikipedia, I am also very active on the commons, where I am a sysop as well. I am an OTRS volunteer where I answer English and Hebrew tickets for EnWiki, HeWiki, and the Commons, and have some, albeit limited, experience in handling permission tickets on other projects such as the German and French Wikipedias. My other cross-wiki activities include adding free-use pictures to articles on various projects which lack them. I am on IRC regularly, and have helped the stewards with cross-wiki vandalism from the EnWiki perspective. I am also easily reached through e-mail, and will hopefully be able to respond quickly to the steward e-mail list. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Knows at least one language for which we don't have a steward yet, if Dolev is right. I find it particularly inappropriate to oppose any candidate in this election with the "job collector" argument. For someone who we want to be active in many different wikipedias, it is the best we can wish for if they enjoy collecting different ways to get involved here. SebastianHelm 21:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Avraham is an outstanding contributor to en.wiki. Wikimedia will gain tremendously from his stewardship! Gidonb 21:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Support Avi is a logical choice for the job. And like others, I am disturbed by the charge of "job collector"... it's an attempt to discourage those who can do a lot of jobs real well. Jusdafax 17:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Why is it that anyone who happens to have more than a few responsibilities is a "trophy/hat/power collector"? –Juliancolton | Talk 23:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

For people who "just want to help" there are literally hundreds of deep backlogs that sit ignored. And yet people are falling over each other "just wanting to help" only when the jobs come with fancy trophies. You tell me why that is. --JayHenry 01:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

May have been yes, but the statement "fail to see the relevance to the steward elections" from Julian's question leaves me thinking that more thought could have gone into the answer and that this person would perhaps not use global sysops to their full potential in aiding and assisting (by taking away many menial tasks from Stewards to allow them to concentrate on more worthy subjects) Chaosdruid 20:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree, but since a good portion of the candidates provided similar responses, I have a feeling my question may have not been clear enough. It shouldn't be held against Avi. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I've had good interactions with this user, and cannot really oppose, but I have a gut feeling of hat collecting and having an elitist view of the hierarchy. --Tryptofish 21:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Supported global sysops without evaluating the need or asking for evidence, which is not good stewardship. I'm not seeing significant improvement in the area which caused me to oppose last year; the burst of edits on non-English wikis after the last steward election and in the recent December/January doesn't convince me that your intention is to invest your time into these projects. I do appreciate that you have a lot of responsibilities on en.wp, and fulfill them well, so it is understandable that you haven't put significant time into non-English projects. John Vandenberg 22:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I did not feel the need to to pen my discussions with Mike Lifeguard, Birdy, and others which helped me determine whether or not to support GSs. My understanding was that we were involved in a straight-up vote. -- Avi 23:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I am active in Japanese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Strategic Planning and am an admin in Japanese Wikipedia. I decided to stand as a candidate because I appear less Asian stewards. I work for a company to make and sell air purifiers in Japan. Because I can see many people fairly, I would be a good steward.

Need more stewards from Asia and more with decent language skills. Nobody should be allowed to be a steward if they can't at least read several languages. Low edit count tells me that although this person is engaged in the wiki community he/she isn't a job seeker.--Xania 01:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I am most active at English Wikisource (sysop and checkuser), English Wikipedia (sysop), Commons (sysop), with bits at other sites, plus sit in a number of IRC channels (nick sDrewth). At Wikisource, I'm active in the community generating new transcriptions, and in the community aspects of delivering projects and looking after newbies. I run the bot User:SDrewthbot, using AWB, at Wikisource to do menial tasks, and as time and tasks permit, I will seek approvals elsewhere. Activities in development include interests in Extension:Proofread Page and AWB; plus suggesting little improvements to Mediawiki, and some of the installed extensions. Plenty of web volunteer years and quite a variety of administrator-type roles, have me good at asking difficult questions and being polite about it. A progressive web-denizen who is handy with a mop and bucket. I am here as I was encouraged to offer my services to assist, gently, and hopefully unassumedly.

Certainly more languages would be nice but this candidate has my trust. Will do fine. ++Lar: t/c 01:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Amen, I feel that too; four years of high school French and German is now a long time ago, so I didn't count them, though do follow(ish) Phe and Thomas in IRC. If languages are available in tablet, spray on, patches or injection I will take a course! Other means we can negotiate. :-) billinghurstsDrewth 12:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I think he's very qualified. It's nice to know another language but I don't see it as a make-or-break deal when it comes to stewardship. We almost always end up using English or using an online translator, so I think a more important skill is being able to figure out what someone is asking if they can't communicate it well in English. Conversely, being able to construct a reply that can be easily translated without losing meaning is also important. I think Billinghurst can do both. --Shanel 01:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Trusted Wikisourcerer! I can witness his skill, his gentle and serious approach to newcomers (I knew him in chat where wikilove is optional). Scrivo qui in italiano appositamente per allenarlo all'uso del traduttore automatico ;-). <irony>It would be advisable that new Stewards show some proficiency in Malayalam, Inuktitut and Klingon.</irony>. - εΔω 07:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

While I can completely understand the language concerns I tend to agree with Shanel. I have to admit when I first saw Billinghurst submit his nomination I knew him as a good user but did not think he would make a good Steward mostly because of a lack of xwiki activity as others such as NW have mentioned below. Since then I have gotten to know him better seeing how he acts on wiki and IRC, looking into his past (yea I do that ;) ) and talking to him more and more. I have come to the conclusion that he has in incredible clue that is hugely important for this job and that he would not only be able to do to the Steward job but could be a huge and valuable asset to the Steward team as a whole even when he was busy with other projects. James (TC) 01:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

What I have seen of Billinghurst (mostly at Wikisource) is great. He is helpful and knowledgeable with a great noob-side manner, and he regularly appears in IRC and will always help with a problem quickly. I don't see the language thing (he is not totally monolingual anyway) as an issue because he has much experience with a semi-multinational project (Commons), a relatively small wiki (Wikisource) and a huge one (enwiki), and not every Steward needs to be able to talk to every user. Between Google translate and multilingual colleagues in IRC and on-site, he will be able to deal with anything any non-native speaker of a foreign language could. Inductiveload 05:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

My triple plus. Billinghurst knows how small wikis and their commuities work: he can be a good helper in a distance, and if necessary a good friend and adviser from another wiki community. IMO this kind of understanding is crucial for stewards, more than linguistic ability. --Aphaia 08:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

If a current steward is echoing the characterization "clueful," I'll add my vote to support a monolinguist. Machine translation and a cluefulness is good enough for most circumstances, and when it isn't, the clueful know to ask someone else to handle it. Proofreader77 00:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but a steward works on a multilingual basis and so I can't support someone who is monolingual. Even thought that English is the language you need mostly as a steward, I want to see more then only a native language. Sorry. -Barrastalk 00:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No language skills = not suitable for stewardship. You also seem to be a career wikipedian who just wants another medal. We need fresh faces and preferably fresh faces who speak many languages.--Xania 01:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I have no issue with your vote, however, your opinion about me is both without evidence and unfounded. Please retract that, or present your evidence. billinghurstsDrewth 07:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not withdrawing my comment - this is a vote and I can express my opinion. Here is your evidence: "I am most active at English Wikisource (sysop and checkuser), English Wikipedia (sysop), Commons (sysop)" - that's 3 sysop powers which is already too many. It shows that you're part of the system. We don't need more 'yes' men but people who are willing to do as they please and don't have a cabinet full of 'powers'. Instructing people to withdraw their statements is also very bad for someone who's vying for stewardship.--Xania 21:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure that "people who are willing to do as they please" is the best job description for Steward, which is a highly collaborative role, and one that is pretty tightly bound (the very first policy in the steward handbook is don't decide) to follow consensus, rather than blaze trails. Trail blazing is appropriate for other roles, I think, but not so much for Steward. The stewards as a whole are highly collaborative. ++Lar: t/c 15:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

He's evidently experienced, but it's not especially productive experience in the context of the steward's role. Cyril Washbrook 13:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm suspicious of your attitude, asking a community member to retract a vote. --Specious 21:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Umm, I absolutely didn't. The text above and here clearer indicates that their vote is their vote and not the issue. I asked them to remove or substantiate their commentary about me and my motives. The evidence is around of my work ethic and my method of working. We can rely on evidence or comments on one's character without providing a foundation. billinghurstsDrewth 22:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

No other language and no small wiki experience. Good endorsements, but reply to Xania was inappropriate. I'm saying that as someone who disagrees with Xania's viewpoint. But it was clearly an opinion; you just can't demand from someone to remove their opinion like that. Even if you think the request was justified, you should be able to ask nicely - at least in your native language. SebastianHelm 21:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Lack of communication skills in languages other than English. --Sulmues 15:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry mate, but between global sysops, monolingual and low participation in smaller wikis, I can't support. Sadly, I think you would be a far better steward than some of the other candidates who are also effectively monolingual. John Vandenberg 02:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

English: The 2010 steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted.

Personal info: My name is Carkuni. I am active in Japanese Wikipedia. I Hold roles Bureaucrats, Administrators and CheckUsers on the Japanese Wikipedia. I felt obliged to cooperate with other projects in daily activities (ex. cross-wiki vandalism). I could have run for help to all Wikimedia project members. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Very low crosswiki and Meta activity, but he's an experienced and trusted (from ja.wiki community, at least) user, so he'll do no harm, and Japanese stewards are needed. --Nemo 10:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

More Asian stewards needed, and he looks like a good candidate. Laaknor 12:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm biased through our real-life interaction, even besides our wikinewsiac collaboration (unfortunately not in a long run), but I'd like to give him a chance: anyway he is a good candidate definitely. --Aphaia 08:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

An enormous amount of contributions but unfortunately the vast majority are in the JP projects. We definitely need more stewards who are able to speak (or read) several languages especially Asiatic languages but unfortunately I feel that this user doesn't have enough experience in other language projects at this stage.--Xania 22:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Well-experienced jawp sysop (and BC and CU), trusted by many jawp users (including me). And also I think we need Asian/Japanese stewards, or at least, who speaks Japanese. But I can't say s/he has enough cross-wiki activity/experience to be a steward. So I keep neutral.--aokomoriuta 13:59, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

From readng all of the comments I feel that there are alot of people who think that I am not suitable for the role as steward as I don't have enough life experience from what I have read. It seems that the community around here are all either old and take offence to younger people wanting to edit the wikis and look after it or they just like being in control of things. Therefore I regret that I will withdraw my standing in this election, maybe if the community actually gave youngsters a chance to show themselves then I would consider it. Unless I can see some support in this then I don't see the point in editing the wikis anymore and will have lost a very hard working contributor to the wikis although my input hasnt been as the community would like to see there has been alot that I have done to combat vandals and so on.

I await input from the community if people are brave enough to speak out I would appreciate your support.

Personal info: Hello! My name is Anton, I´m living in Mexico, I´m 22 y/o and I study physics and biomechanics in the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). I´ve been here in wikipedia since 2007. I started doing some minor edits in the spanish and english wikipedias, then translating articles and involving more in-depth on wikimedia projects on several things like uploading images, expanding articles, helping other novice editors and involving in proposals and policy. Across time, I´ve came to love wikimedia and I always do my best to make it better, hence a good reason that I consider for becoming a steward. Lately, I´ve been focusing on two things: proposal and meta-stuff on the english wikipedia; and teaching & guiding new editors.

Well over 3,000 edits across many wikis. Seriously guys how many edits do you want? Would you prefer to elect some sad North American teenager who spends 10 hours a day editing wikipedia yet has no experience of other wikis and can't speak a word of another language. This is the kind of person we need as a steward.--Xania 02:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You quote "being an admin is no big deal", correct just a nice mop and bucket. Though it is a good means to demonstrate your suitability, readiness and understanding of stewardship billinghurstsDrewth 12:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I started editing the Wikimedia projects on 2008 and since then I became a bureaucrat on the Spanish language Wikipedia, the Spanish language Wikibooks, sysop in Wikimedia Commons and a CheckUser here on Meta-Wiki. Also, due to my active involvement in the identification and reversal of vandalism and spam across many wikis I was granted access to the global rollback tool. I am interested in becoming a steward on one hand to help me fight cross-wiki vandals/spammers and, on the other hand, to help out with requests and general maintenance. I am an active member of the SWMT and I monitor through various IRC channels a large number of wikis, specially #cvn-sw. I am also reachable on some other channels like #wikimedia-stewards, #wikimedia-admin or #wikimedia-checkuser/CheckUser-l where I try to help out. An amount of my cross-wiki edits are related too to the spam blacklist. I am avalaible on a daily basis through multiples ways: talk page, email and IRC. I feel I have a fair knowledge & experience about how the tools work and the steward tasks; if elected I would be happy to help the Wikimedia Community on this role. Thank you for your time and consideration and best regards. — Dferg (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Very involved, competent with the tools available to him, and always helpful. In addition, his attitude towards new tools (CU on meta) inspires confidence: unafraid to ask for help and guidance, quick to learn, and is confident while understanding his limits. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Tireless worker, always willing to try his hand at what needs doing, exceedingly mellow, all around great. Also, per my fellow stewards. One of this year's best candidates. ++Lar: t/c 01:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sean7phil 04:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Yes. Strong on stopping SPAM but understands that a lot of contributers on small wiki's are getting creamed by anti-spam fanatics. Relevant nonprofit links are often removed with no sensitivity. I'm glad that this candidate understands this.

Personal info: After a nice Wiki-vacation, I would like to offer my service both as an editor of various Wikis and as a steward. At present I am most active on Norwegian Wikipedia (where I've previously served as an administrator). I am also an administrator at English Wiktionary, though not the most active one. Even though I do not have thorough knowledge of everything the Stewards do, I know the guidelines and basics of Wikipedia very well. Also, working as a web developer, I feel comfortable with gaining knowledge about technical things.

I know him as an very competent and committed editor and (former) sysop./'crat from no.wiki, solid crosswiki experience, very happy to see him back from wikibreak. Strong support. Finn Rindahl 18:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Per supporters; he speaks languages which are currently needed in steward group; I liked his answers to Mike.lifeguard and Millosh. --Nemo 10:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC) Vote moved from "neutral" section, where I added it by mistake because of an edit conflict. Nemo 08:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Support Good levels of activity on a number of projects. I don't buy the opposing concerns but, even then, a steward with a life is better than nothing. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 23:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Active in several languages. I don't share the concern some stated about recent low activity: The fact that he had himself desysopped when he was inactive shows me that he is highly responsible and well aware of the commitment to the community. SebastianHelm 04:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Broad experience and language skills. I have looked at his main projects, and he has indeed returned to a highly-active role. Welcome back, and I hope people review their position before the close of voting! John Vandenberg 01:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

say's self, he's not the most active. We don't neet more not active Stewards. Marcus Cyron 11:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I should make it clear that I meant I'm not the most active en.wiktionary admin, mostly because it's not a project I'm most competent to contribute to and also, they are not the ones in most need of active admins (my personal opinion). I do not intend to be an inactive steward ... then I'll rather ask for my rights to be revoked. --EivindJ 08:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Blanket 'NO' votes for all candidates as a form of protest against open balloting. Riffic 13:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm Sorry, I just can't vote for someone with the recent activity you have had especially with the lack of xwiki work. I hope if you are really interested in it that you nominate yourself again later. James (TC) 23:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Took a wiki-break, and I don't think any project needs inactive sysops. Now that I'm back, I can get sysop rights back at any time, but I won't ask for it during this election, as it might come out a bit wrong. I'm not going to ask for sysop rights just to become a steward. --EivindJ 09:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I can't decide. I'm not very convinced... VonTasha 18:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Woudloper 23:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC) experience in multiple wikis is a pro, not being active in cross-wiki maintenance is a contra: I'm undecided

Also not convinced. This user may just be a power seeker and also aren't 3 of the language he/she claims to be fluent in pretty much the same. I know there are many differences and that they're each classed as languages (not dialects) but Danish, Swedish and Norweigan aren't quite as impressive as, for example, Japanese, Spanish and Urdu.--Xania 02:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC) On second thoughts I am disinclined to vote against this user. I understand why he indicates his language skills as he did and he is honest and upfront about not knowing everything about being a steward. I may change this vote to 'support' later but for now consider this as neutral.--Xania 22:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

- Bjoertvedt 18:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC) - probably a good candidate, but extremely sparse information at his userpage does not point to a notion for openness. After having read his answers at dte discussion page, I change from neutral to favourable. Bjoertvedt 22:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

He'd be a very nice steward because of his skills in many languages and in IT, but I don't think he'll be active. --FollowTheMedia 22:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I've been active on Swedish Wikipedia for about a year. A year might not sound like a very long period, but during this time I've become a real addict, and spend several hours a day looking for vandals and things like that. I'm an admin and rollbacker on the Swedish Wikipedia, and a rollbacker at the English equivalent. I am not very old, but will turn 18 during the voting period. Feel free to ask whatever you want!

Evalowyn's clear and simple candidate speech and answer have satisfied me, so I don't see any problems in her age and alleged lack of experience. Thanks to being an admin on sv:wiki I suppose she is trustworthy in the eyes of her community and has skills in using the admin rights. Furthermore, who of candidates here have ever chance to try to use the steward tool? My estimation: Nobody. (So why she could not?) مر. بولمساهماتالنقاش ‎ 21:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Weak support. Fresh face but fairly limited language skills and still needs a bit more experience on other wikis.--Xania 02:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sole reasons: too unexperienced for this and too young. You know a lot, but not enough. When these reasons change, than we'll see. Maybe then this "no" 'll change into "yes". Kubura 03:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm from Sweden too - and I do strongly advice NOT to take any swedish as stewards - all I've "met" (but one) soon starts to warn people if they just have an other oppinion. In this case she is also "dependent but not experienced" and wrtes noting of what she has written. Assume she will be a pain in the ass for many serious writers. She's also no more then 20-25 years old.Stewards should have a broad spectrum of life, and I doubt that she's got that Awayanoder 12:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Oppose as above Awayanoder 13:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I'm Fail and i come from Montréal, Canada. I'm just here to except a massive fail in supports. If i get elected, i would make abusers fail by locking, making global vandal fail by a global block. I'd be a serious one. I'd be a bitch to anyone who tries to fail me if i'm a steward. I'd screw those who screw with Wikipedia.

« Click for your present as winrar of the election. For me, this is a neutral vote for making me smirk but not causing any need to vote yes or no. • Lirion (Λιριων, Лирион, ليريون)wtf? • 17:51, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: I have been a Wikipedian since October 2006. My home wiki is the English Wikipedia, where I am an administrator and a checkuser. I am an administrator on Commons and Meta, and I am a global rollbacker. I also have access to the info-en and permissions queues as an OTRS volunteer. I believe that I would be a good steward because I already have experience in many areas that stewards deal with. I have extensive experience using the checkuser tool on my home project, and I watchlist most of the steward request pages here on Meta, so I think I have a good idea of how nearly all requests of that sort are handled. I monitor an IRC channel with bots reporting edits from many of the Wikimedia Foundation's less-frequented wikis, and I have made almost 4000 edits over the past year combating vandalism on these projects. As part of my work monitoring these wikis, I often request that stewards block/lock/globally block disruptive users.
Thank you for your consideration! J.delanoygabsadds 04:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

If anyone's worthy of stewardness, it's J.delanoy. He has always stood out as a user who is willing to assist in cross-wiki maintenance, and has proven to have the clue needed for the job. X! 00:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know why steward candidates need to be article writers really. JD is a great choice for the bit. Pmlineditor∞ 07:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Support I recognize that name -- as I do anti-vandal activities, I keep seeing his name, brokering peace agreements between arguing editors, reverting vandalism wholesale across multiple contents. He's involved, like, everywhere. ;) Banaticus

While I understand AD's concerns below, I think stewards should come from all backgrounds, so a pure vandal-fighter can be a good steward even without other involvement. I certainly have little reason to doubt his judgment. Regards SoWhy 11:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

25924 edits in a single project in a single month? We need that active stewards — NickK 12:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Support; opposing arguments do not convince me at all. Positive interaction at other projects, competent user, no reason not to give out the steward bits. Tempodivalse[talk] 16:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Support -- Knows how to disagree without being disagreeable. Works hard to improve the project(s). Knows how to act fast and when not to. A very strong yes.David in DC 14:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Support -- Have interacted with the user. Have literally seen him grow from an editor, vandalfighter to an admin and cu. Have seen his work on en.wiki. No doubts about support if he wants stewardship. Prashanthns 15:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Definitely the best of the available candidates. Neelix 19:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Support. Can't help it - J. delanoy is an excellent admin at enwiki, and would be an asset as a Steward. I'd like to see stronger language skills, but that's not a dealbreaker. Good luck! UltraexactzzTalk 20:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Support appears to be a worthy candidate. Jezhotwells 22:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Support. I've seen this user here and there, and he's always been doing good things when I see him. Bob the Wikipedian 01:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Support — This user is worth every vote. Very sound judgment. He already has experience with CU and I believe OS, so he's well versed on a technical level. He is also dispositioned more towards administrative things, which means we should give him roles he's likely to be active in and is suited for. Master&Expert 07:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Support per Banaticus. </AAAD>... haz(talk) 09:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

When I did RC patrol, I saw the name J.delanoy literally thousands of times. (humor follows) While I have some slight concern J.delanoy is actually a bot from a nearby galaxy, the community surely has complete faith in them. So shall I. Proofreader77 22:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I do agree with concerns about users collecting too many hats and admitedly it did give me pause for a few minutes but ultimately I've been impressed with J Delanoy's contributions to Wikimedia and I think he'd be an excellent steward so am happy to support his candidacy. Sarah 03:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

J.delanoy is an extremely active vandal-fighter and checkuser. That's all I have experienced of him, and it seems that it's mostly all he does. I like to see more in steward candidates. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 04:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

He's one of the three guys who daily (!) helped on #cvn-sw , #cvn-unifications and #wikimedia-stewards for months. Those actions are not logged for him on luxo's tool because they are the stewards which does them which he very often reports. He of course should be able to that on his own without begging others, imho. Kind regards, —DerHexer(Talk) 15:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Considering that is pretty much all the stewards do (vandal fight, checkuser, and oversight), what more would you have like to have seen? NW(Talk) 16:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a dangerously shallow view of the steward role, as I explained to the candidate when he questioned me on IRC. It involves much more power and much more authority than its component user rights. (Even in terms of raw access, stewardship involves more than CU/OS and counter-vandalism, by the way. Bureaucratship is a major one, what with SRP and SRUC and all.) —Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I am going to have to disagree with you there. Requests on SRP are made only after local consensus has been achieved (or at least no substantial objections, in the case of temporary adminship), and stewards will not honor requests in absence of this. The stewards do not judge these requests in the same way that a bureaucrat judges a Request for Adminship, and they are almost never called upon to determine consensus. If anything, (almost) the only part of the bureaucrat bit that stewards use at all is the rename bit, and that is the simplest of the bureaucrat tools. J.delanoygabsadds 07:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Blanket 'NO' votes for all candidates as a form of protest against open balloting. Riffic 13:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

J.delanoy is competent and reliable. He does a tonne of work over on en.wiki. But he has too many hats and too much work at the moment; I couldn't vote to give him more. AGK 15:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Appears to be a job seeker in my opinion. Too many edits which suggests little else to do and that he's already part of the wikipedian establishment. Language skills fairly weak - need much more experience across other language wikis.--Xania 02:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

And that's a bad thing? IMHO, having that much trust in the community is a good thing. I would love to support a user dedicated to the project like that. If I'm the only person who thinks that, I'll shut up. :) GlacierWolf 01:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

"To many hats" is not used for editors who can do multi-tasking pretty well and whose judgment are not questioned.--Caspian blue 17:09, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that. When someone uses the "too many hats" rationale, they don't assume the person is doing this to show off, and I'm the kind of person inclined to give benefit of the doubt and assume he's doing it for a good purpose. In my dealings with J.delanoy, I haven't really see him showing off his flags or anything, so I felt inclined to question your oppose, mostly out of curiosity. GlacierWolf 03:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll put my vote in neutral. J.delanoy certainly has some great contributions, and is a sysop on several projects, including Commons, EnWiki, and Meta, but I think stewards should become bureaucrats before they go for stewardship, to get some experience with adding and removing user groups. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, stewards don't do anything but check a box, enter a few characters in a text field, and press "submit". All decisions are made locally, and the stewards merely flip the switch. I think can handle that without much experience ;-) J.delanoygabsadds 21:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Personal info: Hi! My name is James Alexander. I'm a 25 year old university student (I took 3 years off of school) finishing my degree in May and going into the legal field. I have always loved the Wikimedia projects (all of them) and I try to contribute in ways that interest me the most focusing on cross-wiki abuse, spam and vandalism. As part of that focus I am a sysop and checkuser on the Simple English Wikipedia, a sysop on Meta wiki and an active SWMT member with Global Rollback. On the English Wikipedia I am a co-coordinator of Abuse Response helping to reorganize the old system. If the community thinks that I can be trusted with the steward tools I feel I would be in a better position to continue the work I already do cross-wiki as well as allow me to help in emergencies and with the backlogs on request pages. I idle 24/7 on IRC (in #wikimedia-stewards and #cvn-sw among others) and am regularly available there as well as almost instantly via email or other means. I believe that my language skills have allowed me to be successful cross-wiki as a global rollbacker and would allow me to be successful as a steward. My French and Latin ability allows me to comprehend what is written in both languages as well as most romance languages. I also believe that I have a working grasp of language that has allowed me to work in wikis I can't understand to see if something is abusive or problematic. I have a very strict belief that I cannot do an action without being comfortable with it and if I do not understand something with all the tools and knowledge available to me then I ask for advice to make sure that I do before any action is taken. Because of my checkuser status I am already identified to the foundation. As I always say, if you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask me here or privately.

Very much yes; knows checkuser functions very well, knows steward functions well, participates x-wiki. No issues for me on the time frame issue, skill is much more important. fr33kmant - c 00:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes! Very much in agreement with fr33kman. Knowing what you are doing is more important than years of experience. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ + jh0367 ☯ ~hugs~ 00:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Jamesfor has been actively fighting cross-wiki spam and vandalism, has experience with trusted positions and has my trust. He hasn't been around long, but I don't see that as a reason to oppose. --Erwin 12:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Support In the course of the global sysops-vote, I was ranting "we need more stewards" - so here we go. Some of the "oppose"-votes raise valid concerns, but I'd rather have someone be a steward with background-check than a global sysop without. Seb az86556 09:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

yes it maybe early in the piece, though does very thorough CU work before implementing, and seems fair and prompt with actions. Some of us are not built for WP editing, and serve in other means. I fully support his candidature, especially in lieu of global admins. billinghurstsDrewth 11:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I won't disagree he would be better to more experienced, but his performance and judgment as a checkuser which I know from the list is good enough to convince me his good candidacy. --Aphaia 11:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

A little underexperienced for the job, but other factors more than compensate. Trustworthy. Dank 21:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Support Being conversant with several (in his case Romance) languages is a definite advantage for a steward. Bogorm 15:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I have no problems with your level of commitment to the projects here. Also, lacking anything questionable, I find no reason to vote nay on this. Thank you for offering! NonvocalScream 21:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, but you just became active around July/August last year. As I told you on IRC, one year more experience would be better. So I've to say no for this one, but will surely support you next year. -Barrastalk 00:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe next year... Keep up the good work! Finn Rindahl 01:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)...or maybe this year, on second thought I'm not opposing. Finn Rindahl 21:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Too eager and with not as many small wiki and foreign language wiki edits are might be indicated at first glance. Most edits on small wikis are nothing more than his own userpage being created with a small number of other edits. (1x AF, 1x ANG, 2xAR, 4xARZ, 8xAZ, 1xCSB, 5xDE, 212xEL, 26xSQ, 10xTL and many other small numbers plus lots and lots of projects with only your own user page created). Language skills are better than many but I'm not convinced. I'd prefer stewards to have very strong language skills.--Xania 22:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Nothing personal about you, James, or about you contributions which appear to have been great and I'd support you in future but I agree with those above concerned with your level of experience and I think you'd be a much better steward candidate with another year under your belt. Sarah 03:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Way too green, very little content creation experience, and no usage of language skills anywhere - just userpages everywhere, and the user page on Latin and French projects are in English. John Vandenberg 02:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

A bit too early but come back next year. Language skills could also be better for xwiki functions. --Geitostdiskusjon 19:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

CU experience seems to only be about a month; would prefer to see a little more. Barring any major issues, would definitely support next time. Mr.Z-man 00:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Extremely impressed with what I have seen of this user, so far. Share concerns about experience levels. Should you not make it this year, please keep doing the good things you are doing, and consider standing again next year. In any case, thanks for your help so far. ++Lar: t/c 01:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You've done lots of truly excellent work, and I hope we can find more of it for you to do, but now isn't the time to give you steward tools. I'll be thrilled to do so in the future, however. Perhaps you can help us in a different role until then. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You know what? On reflection, I don't think marking this as an oppose is fair. I don't choose to lend support at this time, but if others wish to do so, I can certainly understand why (it is only a balancing of relevant factors, and it is a fine balance indeed in this case). I wouldn't object if support from others resulted in this succeeding, even if I might want to give Jamesofur more time to gain experience. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought that the globalsysop vote has failed (or is heading that way) so why would he nominate himself for something which may not exist?--Xania 22:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Great user, just would like some more time. If this candidate runs next year, I would probably support. fetchcomms☛ 03:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)